bill, 09:54, martedì 24 gennaio 2012:
> On Mon, 23 Jan 2012 22:47:16 +0100, Bradipus wrote:
>
>> Kelbert Hawsing, 21:52, lunedì 23 gennaio 2012:
>>
>>>>Well given the choice between the UK not getting vital
>>>>supplies and a third rate infantry division I think I'd take
>>>>the UK being inconvenienced.
>>>
>>> Fide Wikipedia, the German garrison in Norway was counted in
>>> hundred of thousands. Sweden is easier terrain, but larger
>>> and more populous. I doubt that one division would be
>>> anywhere near sufficient. Apparently even Denmark has a
>>> garrison of 200,000 troops.
>>>
>>> http://www.milhist.dk/besattelsen/ww2stat/ww2stat.html
>>
>>
>> Of course Norway and Danemark were more in danger of Allied
>> invasion than an occupied *Sweden.
>
> I think the word you need is 'liberation' rather than
> 'invasion'.
The later implies the former. Or vice versa, I am
confused... :-)
These words are not synonyms.
Invasion is a military action. I was thinking that.
Liberation is one of many possible political results of an
invasion.
Germany 1945 was invaded, and not liberated until years later.
Of course I agree that an Allied invasion of previously invaded
*Sweden would also mean liberation of Sweden from Nazi power.
--
o o
|
